Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix links to broken images #107

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Fix links to broken images #107

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
18 changes: 9 additions & 9 deletions metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/community-activity.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ For the detailed the implementations, you can refer to [community_activity.ipynb
## Insights Drawn from the Metrics Model
We counted metric model values every week, with vertical lines representing version release dates. We can see that Community B's score is very stable, with an obvious pattern together with version release dates. Community A, as a young community, shows fast growth at the beginning, even exceeding Community B at some points, but there is no obvious pattern. In order to get deeper insights, we needed to check the result of each metric.

![overall-result](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/overall-result.png)
![overall-result](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/overall-result.png)


## Metric Specific Insights Drawn from the Metrics Model
Expand All @@ -56,33 +56,33 @@ We counted metric model values every week, with vertical lines representing vers

The number of contributors (engaged these 200 repository contributions) in Community B is very stable, Community A shows a surge, which means it successfully attracted many new contributors.

![contributor_count](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/contributor_count.png)
![contributor_count](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/contributor_count.png)

### commit_frequency

The result of Commit Frequency shows high relevance with contributor count. We found that value waves pattern of Community B have the same frequency with metric model overall score.

![commit_frequency](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/commit_frequency.png)
![commit_frequency](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/commit_frequency.png)

### update_since

Project B shows an obvious triangular wave pattern, you would find that almost all the repositories have been maintained before each version was released. However, Project A doesn’t show such capability.

![update_since](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/update_since.png)
![update_since](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/update_since.png)

### comment_frequency

For each single issue, Community A has approximately 5 comments andthe number is very stable. After investigation, we found that each repository in Community A has a stable group of contributors, they always provide support, and the discuss issue-related topics.
For each single issue, Community A has approximately 5 comments and the number is very stable. After investigation, we found that each repository in Community A has a stable group of contributors, they always provide support, and they discuss issue-related topics.

![comment_frequency](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/comment_frequency.png)
![comment_frequency](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/comment_frequency.png)


### issue handling

We analyzed close_issue_count and update_issue_count together, because they had a strong correlation that was reflected by the figure directly. Higher counts of issue handling indicates high contributor involvement.

![close_issue_count](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/close_issue_count.png)
![update_issue_count](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/tree/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/updated_issues_count.png)
![close_issue_count](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/close_issue_count.png)
![update_issue_count](https://github.com/chaoss/wg-metrics-models/blob/main/metrics-model-libs/community-activity/definition/images/updated_issues_count.png)

# References

Expand All @@ -98,4 +98,4 @@ We analyzed close_issue_count and update_issue_count together, because they had
* Vinod Ahuja


**To reference this metric in software or publications please use this stable URL: https://chaoss.community/?p=4736**
**To reference this metric in software or publications please use this stable URL: https://chaoss.community/?p=4736**